Agenda Setting (Week 7)

Lecture 1 Notes

The Policy Cycle

Which agenda?

Governmental agenda: “the list of subjects to which people in and around government are paying serious attention to at any given point in time” (Kingdon, p.166)
Decision agenda: “a smaller set of items that is being decided upon” (Kingdon, p.166)

Agenda setting

Problems vs conditions
Outside initiation vs. inside initiation
Problem tractability and “wicked problems”
Objective construction vs. subjective construction

Policy image

“How a policy is understood and discussed”... portraying an issue “in simplified and favorable terms to nonspecialists… a mixture of empirical information and emotional appeals.” (Baumgartner and Jones, p.25)
The role of “tone”: the evaluative component of a policy image
How they work:
- Simplification: policy images simplify complex issues into easily understandable narratives
- Emotional appeal: they often evoke strong emotions – fear, hope, pride, resentment – to mobilize support or opposition
- Framing: they highlight certain aspects of an issues while downplaying others
- Contestation: competing policy images battle for dominance, shaping public opinion and influencing policy choices

Policy monopoly

A situation where one particular understanding of a policy issue dominates, and control over that issue is concentrated within a specific group, institution, or “policy venue.” Might also be referred to as a subgovernment or policy subsystem
The key to creating and maintaining a policy monopoly is establishing a single supportive policy image
Building up
- Problem definition: attributing bad conditions to political choices
- “Private problems need to be linked to public causes” (B and J, p.27)
- “Problem definition is the active manipulation of images of conditions by competing political actors. Conditions come to be defined as problems through the strategic portrayal of causal stories.” (Stone, quoted in B and J, p.28)
Contestation or destabilization
- Policy venue: institutional locations where authoritative decisions are made considering a given issue
- “May be monopolistic or shared, that is, a single issue may simultaneously be subject to the jurisdiction of several institutions, or it may be within the domain of only one institution.” (B and J, p.31)
- Policy image can be associated with the venue in which they are discussed. Each venue can be home to a different image of the same issue.
- Advocates may “venue shift” to introduce or promote a new policy image

Lecture 2 notes:

The “policy window”

The policy window establishes the order of priority within the decision agenda queue
Windows open because of either the problem stream (crisis or focusing event) or political stream (change in government personnel)
Problem windows: available alternatives are more likely to succeed if the meet the demands of political acceptability
Policy windows: policy ideas are likely to succeed if they address a recognized social problem
Policy windows close when there are no available alternative policy solutions
Predictable and unpredictable
- Predictable (“routinized” or “discretionary”): Federal Budget Announcement, Speech from the Throne, major international gathering (eg. G*). statutory requirements, cycles of reform and quiescence
- Unpredictable (“randome” or “spillover”): crises, focusing event, shift in public opinion, randomness, “spillover effects”
Objective and subjective features
- Objective: change in government, policy renewal, major focusing event
- Subjective: perception of the likelihood of change among key actors
- **effective policy entrepreneurs both recognize objective and subjective conditions and may even foster the subjective conditions
Coupling
- There are policy solutions that are always floating around the policy stream, but they can be elevated to the govt agenda because they are seen as solutions to social problem (problem stream) or a government priority (political stream)
- Solutions need to be coupled with problems and political exigencies
- Kingdom's example: urban mass transit
  - Traffic management?
  - Environmental sustainability?
  - Energy conservation!

Policy entrepreneurs

Who are they? Actors who advocate for specific policies, and connect problems and solutions
What do they do? They seize the opportunity when a policy window opens
- Framing problems and solutions
- Building coalitions and lobbying
- Recognizing the right moment
Qualities
- “Claim to a healing”: expertise, ability to speak for others, or in an authoritative decision-making position
- Political connections or negotiating skill
- Persistence
Inside initiation and outside initiation
- Inside initiation: govt controls problem definition, framing , and issue articulation. Policy entrepreneurs more likely to be a govt official or member of an insider group (“sub-government”)
- Outside initiation: issues appear on the govt agenda because of pressure from groups and individuals outside the govt, and then potentially on the decision agenda if a policy entrepreneur plays their cards rights
Coupling
- Develop ideas, expertise, and proposals well in advance of the opening of a policy window
- “The policy entrepreneur who is ready rides whatever comes along. Any crisis is seized as an opportunity.” – Kingdon, p.182
- “Good ideas lie fallow for lack of an advocate. Problems are unsolved for lack of a solution.” – Kingdon, p.182
Structure and agency
- Structure AND agency
- Timing is created by structural conditions
- The policy entrepreneur also has to seize these conditions to advance new ideas

Lecture 3:

Early Years Policy

Policy venues
- Education and social welfare are within provincial jurisdiction
- Federalism as a source of "institutionality generated veto points”: barriers to national programs
- Federalism also as a source of policy innovation” opportunities for provincial differences
Policy solutions
- Federal: Canada Child Benefit
- Provincial: Full-Day Kindergarten (Ontario)
- Provincial: Subsidized Childcare (Quebec)
Canada Child Benefit
- Reluctance of the federal govt to get engaged in early childhood education and care (provincial responsibility)
- However, federal government has been willing to use tax and transfer capabilities to improve the lives of children and families
- 2016 CCB: tax-free transfer of $6400 per child under 6 , $5400 (6-17); total transfers phasing out at household income above $30,000
- So far, a “success” across PPPE metrics
- Origins and development
  - Policy image: childcare as an issue of women’s equality
  - Royal Commission on the Status of Women (1970): recommends maternity leave program and national day care act
  - Trudeau’s Task Force on Childcare (1984): recommends national and universal childcare program (loses election soon after)
  - Special Parliamentary Committee on Childcare (1988): recommendations lead to Canada Childcare Act, which is opposed by advocates
  - Issue is pushed off the agenda + 1990s deficit reduction
- Design and adoption
  - New policy image: Childcare policy as a matter of poverty reduction
  - Childcare seen as a provincial issue (venue shifting)
  - Shift in the view of the policy problem: childhood poverty
  - 1992: Child Tax Benefit
  - 1998: Canada Child Tax Benefit
  - 2006: Universal Child Care Benefit (not means tested)
  - 2016: CCB (means tested)
  - Gradual expansion and development of cash transfer policy across Liberal and Conservative governments
Full-Day Kindergarten
- Ontario
- Best Start Program (2005): “Best start will provide many more families with easy, affordable access to services and supports, so that all Ontario children can arrive in Grade 1 healthy, ready and eager to learn”
- Ontario launches commission to study full day kindergarten 2007
- Premier McGuinty appoints Dr. Charles Pascal as “special advisor on early learning” (policy entrepreneur)
- Pascal convenes community roundtables and consults with teachers
- Recommends play-based learning program taught by certified teachers
- Shift in policy image from women’s equality to social investment
- Policy entrepreneur (Pascal) couples the politics stream (McGuinty government, “the education premier”), the policy stream (“Best Start”) and the problem stream (need to invest in children to improve the future economy)
Subsidized day care
- Quebec
- 1995: Parti Quebecois govt looking for distinctive social programs, post-referendum
- Other provinces targeting childhood poverty, Quebec focuses on balancing work and family life
- Shift away from por-nationalist policies to family policy
- Childcare as a labour market strategy to boost maternal employment
- Policy image: subsidized day care promotes women’s equality ++ Quebec’s economy and national autonomy
- Quebec explicitly looks to build social models outside of the federal framework
- $5/day childcare introduced (increased to $7 in 2003, sliding scale in 2015, and back to $8.35 in 2019)
- Challenges with overall quality of care and expansion of commercial daycare
- Government permits growth in for-profit centres and unlicensed providers to try to meet public demand
- Very popular program, with popular pushback against programmatic changes
Policy innovation and learning
- Learning from Quebec: limited policy emulation, advice from pilot projects in BC and Newfoundland. Ontario’s $10/day program has struggled, and future is uncertain
- Learning from Ontario: seven provinces and one territory offer full-day kindergarten for children five and up. NWT extends to age four, with similar plans in Quebec and Nova Scotia

Reading notes:

Kingdon. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies

Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies

Introduction

Title: "Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies"
Author: John W. Kingdon
Publisher: Longman, an imprint of Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Locations: New York, Reading, Massachusetts, Menlo Park, California, Harlow, England, Don Mills, Ontario, Sydney, Mexico City, Madrid, Amsterdam

The Political Stream

Overview of the Political Stream

The political stream plays a significant role in shaping policy agendas.
It encompasses national moods, election outcomes, and political configurations that strongly influence which topics gain attention.

Impact of National Mood and Elections

National mood combined with election outcomes can create powerful effects on policy agendas:
- Example: The deregulation of transportation industries occurred largely due to changing public sentiment around government regulation.
- President Reagan’s early budget victories illustrate the influence of public desire for smaller government over organized interests benefiting from federal programs.

Distinction Between Agenda and Alternatives

Importance of distinguishing between the policy agenda and the alternatives:
- Agenda Impact: National mood/elections can elevate certain issues to the policy agenda, sidelining others.
- Alternatives Control: Once an issue is on the agenda, organized interests seek to influence or control the final policy outcomes but have less influence over initial agenda-setting.

The Policy Window and Joining Streams

Concept of the Policy Window

A policy window is a critical opportunity for advocates to promote their proposals or highlight their concerns.
This concept can be likened to a surfer waiting for the 'big wave'; advocates prepare their solutions in anticipation of opportunities that may arise.

When Policy Windows Open

Windows can open in predictable ways (e.g., scheduled program renewals) or unpredictably due to sudden political events (e.g., economic crises, disasters).
Policy entrepreneurs must have proposals ready to capitalize on these fleeting opportunities.

Examples of Policy Windows:

The Penn Central collapse opened opportunities for regulatory reform in railroads as advocates sought solutions.
Scheduled renewals of programs often create predictable opportunities for policy advocacy.

Coupling of Streams

Successful policy change requires coupling three streams: problem, proposal, and political context.
This process often occurs when a problem exists, a viable policy alternative is available, and there is favorable political alignment.

Psychology of Policy Windows

The opening of a window changes the nature of the decision agenda, which includes topics under serious consideration for legislative action.
Examples from the 1965–66 emergence of the Great Society programs demonstrate how political shifts (i.e., Democratic majorities) capitalize on moments of opportunity.

Fragility of Policy Windows

Policy windows are transient; they may close quickly if proposals are not advanced or if political environments shift.
Once a window closes without action, advocates may have to wait for extended periods for another opportunity.

Factors Leading to Policy Window Closure

Reasons for Closure

A policy window may close due to:
- Action taken on the relevant issue.
- Lack of sustained momentum or advocacy.
- Changing political landscapes or waning public interest.

Implications of Time Sensitivity

The urgency of taking action during an open window is key to successful policy advocacy; waiting too long can jeopardize proposals.

Perception and Misestimations

The existence of a policy window is often perceived subjectively; various stakeholders may misinterpret the likelihood of their proposals being considered.
Differing views on the openness of a window can lead to varied strategic responses from advocates and stakeholders.

Coupling and the Role of Policy Entrepreneurs

Definition of Entrepreneurs

Policy entrepreneurs are individuals who invest resources (time, political capital, etc.) to advocate for solutions.
Examples: Cabinet secretaries, senators, lobbyists, or other influential advocates who propose initiatives at opportune moments.

Qualities of Successful Entrepreneurs

Key qualities of effective entrepreneurs include:
- Claim to Hearing: Established expertise, representation of a strong interest group, or a position of authority grants them a platform.
- Political Connections: Ability to negotiate effectively and navigate political landscapes.
- Persistence: Demonstrated willingness to advocate continuously, utilizing various strategies to maintain pressure.

Role in the Joining of Streams

Entrepreneurs actively seek to couple their proposals to problems and political opportunities as windows open.
Their preparation allows them to adjust and seize opportunities quickly.

Occurrence of Windows

Predictable vs. Unpredictable Windows

Some windows open regularly (e.g., through scheduled renewals and legislative cycles), while some arise unexpectedly.
The ability to recognize when windows are likely to open is essential for advocates.

Capacity and Constraints

The political system has limited capacity to handle multiple issues at once; often pressing items will crowd out others, leading to competition for attention.

Spillovers

Concept of Spillover

Spillover refers to how the opening of one policy window can lead to the opening of others for adjacent issues.
Successful changes in policy can create precedents that facilitate future changes in similar areas.

Mechanisms of Spillover

Establishing a principle with landmark legislation can alter the political landscape, allowing future proposals to proceed with greater ease.
Examples include the relationship between aviation deregulation and subsequent attempts in trucking deregulation.

Conclusion

The interaction of problems, policies, and politics is dynamic; coupling these streams when opportunity windows open is crucial for successful advocacy and policy change.
This process emphasizes the necessity of preparation and timely action in leveraging policy opportunities.

Lindquist et al. Chapter 7: Early Years Policy Innovations Across Canada: A Policy Success?

Historical Context and Challenges

Welfare State Norms:
- Built around the ideals of male-breadwinner and female-caregiver roles.
- Policies were based on the moral concept of 'cause of need' rather than 'fact of need', which marginalized particular groups of women such as those affected by race, sexuality, and class (Brodie, 2008).
- Resulted in welfare structures that often surveilled and stigmatized recipients, especially single mothers (Brodie, 2008).
Continuity of Gendered Norms:
- The ‘worker-citizen’ paradigm persisted, causing childcare to be seen as a family responsibility and a ‘women’s issue’ (Dobrowolsky and Jenson, 2004).
- Despite shifts towards gender equality, remnants of previous norms still influence existing policies.
Policy Resistance:
- Existence of socially conservative actors, including Conservative-led governments, that support traditional gender roles in caregiving (White, 2017).

Comparative and Statistical Analysis

Canada’s Performance vs. OECD:
- Canada ranks poorly in several key areas related to early years policies compared to OECD countries, such as:
  - 24th in maternal and parental leave policies (UNICEF, 2020).
  - 26th in terms of support for child poverty.
  - 28th in investments in children and families, including Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC).
- While aggregate indicators are poor, some policy successes at federal and provincial levels are noted that deserve deeper examination.

Federal and Provincial Dynamics in Early Years Policy

Constitutional Challenges:
- Federal government’s role is limited by the constitutional division of powers, primarily leaving social policy to provincial governments.
- Federal spending power for early years policy has fluctuated, often using tax incentives and intergovernmental transfers to drive provincial measures.
Key Policies Examined:
- Child Tax Benefit (CTB):
  - Introduced in 1992, it evolved into the Canada Child Benefit (CCB) in 2016, combining earlier programs into one targeted support for families.
- Ontario’s Full-Day Kindergarten (FDK):
  - Introduced in 2011, showcasing a significant investment in early education.
- Québec’s Maternity and Parental Leave Benefits:
  - Introduced in 2006, with a focus on supporting maternal employment and child development.
  - Subsidized childcare model introduced in the 1990s.

Metrics of Policy Success

Assessment Metrics:
- Analyzed using programmatic, process, political, and consolidation features (see Table 7.1).
- Success ratings presented in dichotomous terms (success/not) but detailed quantitative successes are outlined.
Table 7.1: Case Metrics of Success
- Jurisdiction | Programmatic | Process | Political | Endurance
- Federal | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓
- Ontario | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓
- Québec | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ~

Case Study 1: Canada Child Benefit (CCB)

Overview:
- The CCB is a significant federal cash transfer aimed at reducing child poverty and supporting family income.
- Benefit Structure:
  - Up to $6,400 per child under age 6 and $5,400 for ages 6-17.
  - Phasing out begins at household incomes above $30,000.
Political Context:
- Calls for a national maternity leave and daycare act dating back to the Royal Commission on the Status of Women (1970).
- The evolving political climate shaped the policy scope, particularly after shifting public discourse around child welfare and poverty.

Case Study 2: Ontario Full-Day Kindergarten (FDK)

Introduction:
- Initiated under the Liberal government of Dalton McGuinty in 2003, expanding early learning investments.
Policy Developments:
- The Best Start Plan, introduced in 2005, aimed to enhance childcare quality and affordability.
- Full-day kindergarten launched in September 2010 as a pivotal program offering early education access to all.
Community Engagement:
- Public consultations were held to design the FDK program, highlighting the importance of both expert and community input in framing effective policies.

Case Study 3: Québec Maternity and Parental Leave

Distinct Focus:
- Québec’s approach for early years and family policy investments is lauded for expanding maternal employment and child support systems.
Policy Innovations:
- Notable for its unique Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP), which offers generous leave policies compared to federal EI benefits.
Ongoing Challenges:
- Issues with the maintenance of childcare quality as the sector expands, particularly concerning regulatory oversight of for-profit centers.

Conclusions and Lessons Learned

Policy Adoption Variability:
- Success of federalism in fostering policy innovation can often lead to mixed outcomes in different jurisdictions regarding policy adoption.
Emulation Dynamics:
- Successful policies, like Ontario’s FDK, have seen wider uptake, but innovative Québec family policies have failed to gain traction elsewhere, highlighting the influence of local political narratives on policy success.
Future Directions:
- Continued exploration of the federal investments may lead to new strategies across provinces, and opportunities for improved early years policies emerge as governmental priorities shift.

Howlett et al., Chapter 4

What Is Agenda-Setting?

Focuses on how and why certain issues gain government attention while others do not.
Determines which issues become “problems” requiring government action.
Involves:
- Defining what counts as a problem.
- Exploring possible solutions.
- Assessing political support for action.
Kingdon’s definition (1984): Agenda = list of issues government officials are seriously considering at a given time.
Agenda-setting narrows all possible issues to those that actually get attention.
Considered the most critical stage of the policy cycle since early decisions shape all later policy outcomes.
Some issues:
- Stay on the public radar for long periods before action.
- Rise suddenly to attention.
- Never reach the agenda or recur without resolution.
Scholars study why different issues follow different trajectories in policymaking.

Issue Initiation

Two main types:
1. Inside Initiation
  - Issue originates within government.
  - Government controls definition, framing, and timing.
  - Public may be unaware of debates or policy formation.
  - Common for technical or sensitive issues (e.g., pension reform, national security).
  - Sometimes involves influential insider groups with special access.
  - Aims to avoid public scrutiny or political conflict.
  - Seen in banking regulation, trade negotiations, etc.
2. Outside Initiation
  - Issue originates outside government through public pressure, lobbying, or advocacy.
  - Starts in society, moves to public debate, then to government agenda.
  - Depends on how well non-governmental actors mobilize support.
  - Frequency varies by political system:
    - Open systems (e.g., California, Switzerland) → high outside initiation.
    - Closed systems (e.g., Belarus, China, North Korea) → suppressed or illegal interest groups.
    - Hybrid/controlled systems (e.g., Singapore, Rwanda) → limited outside initiation due to state dominance.

Issue Articulation

How an issue is framed determines how it is treated in policy.
Different framings → different responses and policy priorities.
- Example: Low female school enrolment
  - Framed as “education” issue → limited attention.
  - Framed as “development/economic” issue → higher priority and funding.
Actors (state and non-state) try to create “policy monopolies” by controlling problem definitions and public images.
Government campaigns (education, information) shape how public perceives problems.
Crises can disrupt these monopolies and open space for alternative framings.
- Example: 2006 U.S. debate on Middle East war reframed from “how to win” to “why are we still there?”
Loss of framing control occurs when government communication fails, enabling competing narratives.

Issue Expansion

Even popular or well-supported issues may struggle to reach the formal government agenda.
Outside actors face greater challenges—must rely on costly, time-consuming mobilization (public campaigns, lobbying, protests).
Examples of successful issue expansion:
- MADD and anti–drunk driving campaigns
- Drug legalization movements (e.g., marijuana)
- LGBTQ+ rights advocacy
These groups used sustained public education and lobbying to influence both public opinion and policy change.
Inside actors don’t need public mobilization but must compete internally with many other governmental and external priorities.
Government and public agendas interact — government actions (e.g., education campaigns, funding decisions) influence what the public defines as “problems.”
Some actors frame or promote issues for strategic reasons (e.g., to deflect from failures or gain support).
Reinforces that agenda-setting is political and interpretive, not purely rational or technical.

Agenda-Entrance

Timing is critical — issues reach the agenda when a policy window or opportunity opening arises (Kingdon, 1984).
Windows can be random (e.g., crises, disasters, elections) or predictable (scheduled renewals or cycles).
Examples of random events:
1. Airplane crash → safety reform
2. Brexit (2016) or Trump’s election → major political shifts
Four types of policy windows (Howlett, 1998):
1. Routinized – scheduled events (e.g., budgets, legislative renewals)
2. Discretionary – based on decision-makers’ preferences
3. Random – unpredictable shocks or crises
4. Spillover – related issues gain attention via other open windows
Windows are short-lived → actors must be prepared to act quickly.
Successful agenda actors anticipate and plan for these opportunities.
Analytical capacity (predicting, preparing, mobilizing) is key to effective agenda management.

The Problematics of Agenda-Setting: Issue-Attention Dynamics

Issue-Attention in Governments and Society

Agenda-setting = recognizing a subject as a “problem” needing government attention.
Recognition ≠ guaranteed action — only signals potential for policy attention.
Problems can arise from:
- Threats or failures in existing programs, or
- Opportunities (e.g., disasters prompting safety reforms).
The shift from private concern → public issue involves social construction (not just objective recognition).
Early (positivist) views: problems objectively exist and await discovery.
Later (post-positivist) views: problems are socially and politically constructed — defined through frames and values (Goffman, Schon & Rein).
Governments often struggle to:
- Understand root causes
- Gauge feasibility
- Control issue sequencing
Agendas are often influenced by external shocks, partisan politics, and media cycles rather than rational prioritization.

Problems vs. Conditions

Condition: aspect of life that may cause concern but is not changeable by government (e.g., aging).
Problem: an undesirable and addressable effect of a condition (e.g., elderly poverty).
Example:
- Airplane crashes = condition (inevitable accidents)
- Air safety standards = problem (can be improved by policy).
A problem exists when the issue is amenable to government intervention (Kingdon, 1984; Peters, 2005).

Problem Tractability

Tractability = how easy a problem is to solve.
Tractable problems (“tame” problems):
- Have clear causes and feasible solutions (e.g., seat belt laws).
Intractable problems (“wicked” problems):
- Have uncertain causes, disputed boundaries, unclear solutions.
- Examples: homelessness, drug abuse, climate change.
Well-structured problems are rare — most easy issues are already addressed (“low-hanging fruit”).
Wicked problems are increasingly common, involving cross-sectoral and global issues.
Issue-attention cycle (Downs, 1972):
- Public outrage → attention → realization of costs/difficulty → decline in attention → recurrence after new trigger.
- Example: Gun violence debates after mass shootings in the U.S.